Why don't we have a single NGB for all shooting sports?

Bananaman

Sikamick wrote: »

Personally I would prefer to see each NGB representing their own clubs/members and applying for funding, then you would not have the likes of the SSAI acting as mandarins and dictating who can or who can not become an NGB and or sit on their committee.

I tend to agree, in principle, but have an issue with one part of it.

The bit of your statement I have an issue with is "each NGB representing their own clubs/members"
Personally, I think that is and would be a mistake. It only fosters division.

Personally I think that every decision made by any NGB, club etc should be wieghed up on whether it
promotes divisiopn and if so alter it accordingly so it does not.

I believe that there should be one NGB -
which deals with the ISC, holds all the affiliations, etc.

All the clubs and ranges are members of it and it represents them all equally.
All of the sports are administered by it -
with a specific subcommittee/co-ordinator/coach/all of those on a per discipline basis.
With a shared sporting calendar, national rnakings, championships, leagues, etc.,

The accounts/funding applications/etc. would be done by the treasurer, who would be an accountant.

All roles to be formally defined so that people have a job to do, should they put themslves forward
for election or just volunteer to help. How they di to be reported on at AGM.

That would cut out the majority of the little hitlers and remove all the fiefdoms.
If going to do any PR or politics - hire professionals to do it - or don't do it.

It would centralise the information, costs, spending, administration, advertising, etc.

It would give the NGB purchasing and negotiating power for equipment, consumables, facilities,
insurance, etc. on behalf of the entire club network.

Overall it would streamline the processes.

As far as I can tell - only the ISSF afiliates could not play in that sand pit for quasi legal reasons
and only then if the IPSC affiliate decided it would.

Yet more (individuals) would not play in it because of personal issues - but there are drugs for most of those now.

Obviously any attempt to have all the shooting sports on an equal footing or standing as one would be fought tooth and nail
by anyone with a tooth or a nail but that does not mean it is the wrong thing to do -
It just means some people are afriad of that happening and yet more are afraid of change.

Originally, I thought that is what the SSAI was.

I soon realised it was just another load of stuffed shirts.
When Ahern first got up on his horse - the SSAI had an opportunity to stand up and be counted - but it bottled and fiddled while rome burned.
The only reason people seemed to be in it were to "keep an eye on each other" and "manage the funds" - they made a compoete bollix of both of those.

Then I thought that is what the NASRPC is.
I soon realised it was just another load of stuffed shirts - in fact the same stuffed shirts.

It needed fixing - not denying that
It also refused to stand up for shooters when Ahern rode into town - as we all know - some of those involved took it upon themselves
to come up with proposals that they never sought sanction for.

However, It already represented the majority of clubs and ranges and hence a large proportion of shooters.

It already administered a number of sports

Since the "fixing" began the club network has grown, the sports development has moved on apace.
The attacks have increased in frequency and intesity and there are continual attempts to sperate the sports from the NASRPC and dilute it.

But I still think that it is the way to go.

I'm not hung up on who or what is "in charge" - I really don't care and do not trust people who do.

I understand that you cannot have certain people "in charge" because they have been corrupted by time
and plenty are just "not right in the head" and not able to do it.

Loads of people will tell you why it could not happen or should not happen.

Not so many people will tell you how it could happen.

I think it should happen.

But then, that's just me, what do I know.

Sparks

Bananaman wrote: »

Personally I think that every decision made by any NGB, club etc should be wieghed up on whether it promotes divisiopn and if so alter it accordingly so it does not.

But wouldn't every decision be old news?

But then, that's just me, what do I know.

Not much in the way of history or irony it would seem, whatever about other fields of human knowledge.

Sparks

And for the record...
Why don't we have a single body for all shooting?

Bananaman

Sparks wrote: »

And for the record...
Why don't we have a single body for all shooting?

You, as with everyone else, are entitled to your opinion.

B'Man

Sparks

Why thank you B'man, but my entitlement to my opinion was not at issue at any point.

Sparks

Posts split out to avoid derailing the original thread.

Bananaman

Sparks wrote: »

Why thank you B'man, but my entitlement to my opinion was not at issue at any point.

Your post on the Wiki as to why it could not work or should not be done
is just that - your opinion.

<mod snip - offtopic content moved back to the original thread>

Sparks

Bananaman wrote: »

Your post on the Wiki as to why it could not work or should not be done is just that - your opinion.

Actually, it's a summary of experience gained over the last fifty years of people trying it (and yes, including my own).

Bananaman

Due to excessive snipping in order to remove context and dilute my points I am no longer posting to this thread.

cavan shooter

This should be fun I'll sit back and watch for a bit....:D

Sparks

Bananaman wrote: »

Due to excessive snipping in order to remove context and dilute my points I am no longer posting to this thread.

Your post's content was not deleted. The parts relating to this thread are in this thread and the parts relating to the other thread are now in the other thread.

You're the one who was complaining yesterday that threads here went off-topic Bananaman. Are you now complaining that you're not able to take them off-topic at will?

bunny shooter

An old politicans trick....................change the subject to avoid the original question :rolleyes:

Sikamick

Bananaman I don't want to sound disrespectful, but my Mother always told me, keep it simple stupid.

Your post below is so long winded and complicated it would put me off being belong to any umbrella group, to much interference.

If we are going to have an umbrella group it should be one with a proven record, one that represents and supports it's members without interference in their day to day running of their particular discipline's/sport.

One example would be the affiliation between VCRAI and the NARGC, since that affiliation the NARGC have never done anything but support us in what we do.

Sikamick

_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sikamick

Personally I would prefer to see each NGB representing their own clubs/members and applying for funding, then you would not have the likes of the SSAI acting as mandarins and dictating who can or who can not become an NGB and or sit on their committee.
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

I tend to agree, in principle, but have an issue with one part of it.

The bit of your statement I have an issue with is "each NGB representing their own clubs/members"
Personally, I think that is and would be a mistake. It only fosters division.

Personally I think that every decision made by any NGB, club etc should be wieghed up on whether it
promotes divisiopn and if so alter it accordingly so it does not.

I believe that there should be one NGB -
which deals with the ISC, holds all the affiliations, etc.

All the clubs and ranges are members of it and it represents them all equally.
All of the sports are administered by it -
with a specific subcommittee/co-ordinator/coach/all of those on a per discipline basis.
With a shared sporting calendar, national rnakings, championships, leagues, etc.,

The accounts/funding applications/etc. would be done by the treasurer, who would be an accountant.

All roles to be formally defined so that people have a job to do, should they put themslves forward
for election or just volunteer to help. How they di to be reported on at AGM.

That would cut out the majority of the little hitlers and remove all the fiefdoms.
If going to do any PR or politics - hire professionals to do it - or don't do it.

It would centralise the information, costs, spending, administration, advertising, etc.

It would give the NGB purchasing and negotiating power for equipment, consumables, facilities,
insurance, etc. on behalf of the entire club network.

Overall it would streamline the processes.

As far as I can tell - only the ISSF afiliates could not play in that sand pit for quasi legal reasons
and only then if the IPSC affiliate decided it would.

Yet more (individuals) would not play in it because of personal issues - but there are drugs for most of those now.

Obviously any attempt to have all the shooting sports on an equal footing or standing as one would be fought tooth and nail
by anyone with a tooth or a nail but that does not mean it is the wrong thing to do -
It just means some people are afriad of that happening and yet more are afraid of change.

Originally, I thought that is what the SSAI was.

I soon realised it was just another load of stuffed shirts.
When Ahern first got up on his horse - the SSAI had an opportunity to stand up and be counted - but it bottled and fiddled while rome burned.
The only reason people seemed to be in it were to "keep an eye on each other" and "manage the funds" - they made a compoete bollix of both of those.

Then I thought that is what the NASRPC is.
I soon realised it was just another load of stuffed shirts - in fact the same stuffed shirts.

It needed fixing - not denying that
It also refused to stand up for shooters when Ahern rode into town - as we all know - some of those involved took it upon themselves
to come up with proposals that they never sought sanction for.

However, It already represented the majority of clubs and ranges and hence a large proportion of shooters.

It already administered a number of sports

Since the "fixing" began the club network has grown, the sports development has moved on apace.
The attacks have increased in frequency and intesity and there are continual attempts to sperate the sports from the NASRPC and dilute it.

But I still think that it is the way to go.

I'm not hung up on who or what is "in charge" - I really don't care and do not trust people who do.

I understand that you cannot have certain people "in charge" because they have been corrupted by time
and plenty are just "not right in the head" and not able to do it.

Loads of people will tell you why it could not happen or should not happen.

Not so many people will tell you how it could happen.

I think it should happen.

But then, that's just me, what do I know.